infrastructure and operations audit of the mora national ... · renewable energy laboratory,...

Infrastructure and Operations Audit of the Mora National Fish Hatchery 2015

Mora National Fish Hatchery US Fish and Wildlife Service Jack Christiansen U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Nathan Wiese U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

2 | P a g e

Contacts

US Fish and Wildlife Service

Mora National Fish Hatchery

Nathan Wiese Project Leader PO Box 689 Mora, NM 87732 Phone: 575-387-6022 ext 13 (office) E-mail: [email protected]

US Fish and Wildlife Service

Lower Snake River Compensation Program

Jack Christiansen Aquaculture Engineer 276 Complex Drive Orofino, ID 83544 Phone: 208-721-2474 E-mail: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

3 | P a g e

Acknowledgments On November 18-20th, 2014, Jack Christiansen, Aquaculture Engineer from the Lower Snake River Compensation Program; Jae Ahn, Facility Operation Specialist from the Fish and Aquatic Resource Conservation Regional Office; Mark Orton Energy (Mechanical/Electrical) Engineer, Engineering Division of the Regional Office; and James Salasovich from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, conducted an infrastructure and operations audit of the Mora National Fish Hatchery.

Special thanks to Jeff Conway, Richie Garcia, Lori Casados, Grant Langmaid, and Daniel Gallegos for providing information and input on the facility.

This summary document was prepared by Jack Christiansen and Nathan Wiese and reviewed by Jae Ahn.

4 | P a g e

Executive Summary

The mission of the Mora National Fish Hatchery (Hatchery) is preserving the five currently recognized relict lineages of Gila trout (Oncorhynchus gilae gilae). The five lineages of Gila trout are: South Diamond, Main Diamond, Spruce Creek, Whiskey Creek, and Iron Creek. The Gila trout was re-classified from Endangered to Threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 2005. Major risks to Gila Trout populations include: habitat degradation, wildfires, hybridization with rainbow trout, and competition with non-native trout species. In November 2014, Jack Christiansen, Aquaculture Engineer from the Lower Snake River Compensation Program; Jae Ahn, Facility Operation Specialist from the Fish and Aquatic Resource Conservation Regional Office; Mark Orton R2 Energy (Mechanical/Electrical) Engineer, Engineering Division of the Regional Office; and James Salasovich from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, conducted an infrastructure and operations audit of the Mora National Fish Hatchery.

This document provides Mora National Fish Hatchery stakeholders with ample conceptual-level information of the current infrastructure challenges. As a result of the audit and follow-up collaboration with all who participated, a strategic approach to meet these challenges through in-house and external efforts will allow the Hatchery to reach untapped potential. These efforts will result in significant improvements in water quality, program capacity, efficiency, and adaptability at the facility. The infrastructure and operations audit has identified projects to improve efficiencies and align with energy conservation goals in a 5-year capital outlay plan. The total plan cost is $1.15M.

There is a significant savings projected by utilizing the in-house staff resources for accomplishing the infrastructure and operations projects. The Hatchery staff are motivated, energetic, knowledgeable, and dedicated to the success of the Gila trout recovery program. These same staff members have already accomplished numerous infrastructure improvements with minimal resources. The proposed projects seek to build on the staff’s expertise and enthusiasm to take the Hatchery and the Gila trout program into to the future.

Investment into the Mora National Fish Hatchery and Gila trout recovery is a sound use of resources. The Hatchery’s unique planning and design has made it a harbinger for the National Fish Hatchery system. Mora’s crew is exceptional and serves as a model for teamwork and cooperation towards a common vision. Updating the Mora National Fish Hatchery will cement the success of the Gila trout recovery program and create a model for further successes of the Fisheries Program.

5 | P a g e

Table of Contents

1 Background ........................................................................................................................................... 6 2 Scope ..................................................................................................................................................... 7

2.1 Infrastructure ................................................................................................................................. 8 2.2 Purpose .......................................................................................................................................... 9

3 Operational/Infrastructure Changes for Program Efficiency ......................................................... 10

3.1 Water Conditioning ..................................................................................................................... 10 3.2 Well Field Efficiency .................................................................................................................. 11 3.3 Raceway Rearing Water Efficiency ............................................................................................ 13 3.4 Incubation Water Supply System ................................................................................................ 14 3.5 System Influent De-gassing Modifications ................................................................................. 15 3.6 Alarm System Re-hab ................................................................................................................. 17 3.7 Isolation Systems ......................................................................................................................... 18 3.8 Water Monitoring ........................................................................................................................ 20 3.9 Water Disinfection Systems ........................................................................................................ 20 3.10 Ground-Source Heat Pump Conversion ...................................................................................... 21 3.11 System Modification to Meet Program Objectives ..................................................................... 22

3.11.1 System 1 Modifications .................................................................................................. 23 3.11.2 System 2 Modifications .................................................................................................. 24 3.11.3 System 3 Modifications .................................................................................................. 25

4 Summary ............................................................................................................................................. 28 5 References .......................................................................................................................................... 34

Figure 1. Gila Trout released, future Gila Trout goals, and original capacity targets. .................................. 7 Figure 2. Water Conditioning oxygen contactor for storage reservoir. ...................................................... 11 Figure 3. Well Re-hab and installation of soft-start and VFD controllers .................................................. 13 Figure 4. Raceway baffle and screen slot modifications. ............................................................................ 14 Figure 5. Incubation water supply system. ................................................................................................. 15 Figure 6. System Influent Degassing Modifications ................................................................................... 17 Figure 7. Isolation Rearing System ............................................................................................................. 19 Figure 8. Vacuum degassing model ............................................................................................................ 19 Figure 9. Average Annual System Temperatures ....................................................................................... 21 Figure 9. Hatchery Gila Recovery Flow Diagram for each Lineage .......................................................... 26 Figure 10. Current System tank configuration ............................................................................................ 27 Figure 11. Proposed tank configuration for Gila trout program ................................................................. 27 Appendix 1. Proposed Production Capacities ............................................................................................. 29 Appendix 2. Budget Outlay, Fiscal Year 2015-2019 .................................................................................. 30 Appendix 3. Power Consumption by Process Application ......................................................................... 31 Appendix 4. System Modeling.................................................................................................................... 32 Appendix 5. 2-D Nature’s Rearing for Circular tanks ................................................................................ 33

6 | P a g e

1 Background

The mission of the Mora National Fish Hatchery (Hatchery) is preserving the five currently recognized relict lineages of Gila trout (Oncorhynchus gilae gilae). The five lineages of Gila trout are: South Diamond, Main Diamond, Spruce Creek, Whiskey Creek, and Iron Creek. The Gila trout was re-classified from Endangered to Threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 2005. Major risks Gila Trout populations include: habitat degradation, wildfires, hybridization with rainbow trout, and competition with non-native trout species. To meet the mission, the Hatchery has focused on the development of 5 captive broodstocks, one for each lineage. To date, the Main Diamond and South Diamond lineages have successful captive broodstocks as defined by the Gila Trout – Genetic Broodstock Management Plan. The Whiskey Creek lineage is in year 2 of captive broodstock development. The Spruce and Iron Creek lineages are in the beginning stages of brood stock development. In addition to development of captive broodstocks, the Hatchery is also tasked with providing Age-0 and Age-1 fish for recovery stocking efforts. These recovery stockings are guided by the Gila Trout Recovery Team. The Hatchery focuses on raising Gila trout that have a high likelihood of surviving in the wild or high degree of fitness level which include: genetic and fish health monitoring, naturalistic rearing, poly-culture, broodstock management and research, and spawning and culture for recovery. The Hatchery is also committed to supporting the 4(d) rule as part of the downlisting criteria from Endangered to Threatened in 2005. The 4(d) rule provides an exception to the Endangered Species Act to enable the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish and the Arizona Game and Fish Department to allow recreational fishing for Gila trout. The benefits listed in the Federal Register notice for the 4(d) rule include:

1. Providing Eligibility for Federal sport fishing funds 2. Increasing the number of wild populations 3. Enhancing the ability to monitor populations 4. Creating goodwill and support in the local community

To achieve a genetic diversity, captive broodstock, recovery, and 4(d) goals, the Hatchery needs a minimum of 80 pairs of successful brood crosses per lineage according to the Genetic Broodstock Management Plan. These 80 pairs are split evenly between “wild” and “captive” bred Gila trout to maximize genetic diversity. The original plan suggested annual production of 300,000 eggs from each lineage resulting in 1.5 million eggs/fry and 100,000 surplus Gila trout annually. This goal has been in place since 2002, but the Hatchery has struggled to meet these expectations (Figure 1). Low survival, eye-up, fecundity, and wild brood availability have hampered the recovery efforts. This infrastructure and operations audit will develop an integrated master

7 | P a g e

planning approach to Hatchery operations to improve efficiency and effectiveness towards meeting these goals.

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

20

11

20

12

20

13

20

14

20

15

20

16

20

17

20

18

20

19

20

20

Nu

mb

er

of

Fish

Gila Trout at the Mora National Fish Hatchery

Gila Trout Recovery

Hatchery Capacity

Figure 1. Gila Trout released, future Gila Trout goals, and original capacity targets.

2 Scope On November 18-20th, 2014, Jack Christiansen, Aquaculture Engineer from the Lower Snake River Compensation Program; Jae Ahn, Facility Operation Specialist from the Fish and Aquatic Resource Conservation Regional Office; Mark Orton R2 Energy (Mechanical/Electrical) Engineer, Engineering Division of the Regional Office; and James Salasovich from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, conducted an infrastructure and operations audit of the Mora National Fish Hatchery.

The purpose of this document is to provide Mora National Fish Hatchery stakeholders ample conceptual-level information of the current infrastructure challenges. As a result of the audit and follow-up collaboration with all who participated, a strategic approach to meet these challenges through in-house and external efforts will allow the Hatchery to reach its untapped potentials. The goal of incorporating the audit findings into this 5-year strategic plan is intended to maximize in-house and external improvement opportunities by developing solutions that fit resources, budgets, and supportive programs in a logical sequence. These efforts should result in significantly improving water quality, program capacity, efficiency, and flexibility at the facility. As such, at the end of this 5-year effort it is recommended that management perform another programmatic evaluation of the Hatchery to assess progress. There is an inherent difficulty to prove that any facility can operate as designed during the construction and commissioning process, and this often leads to a hatchery project being accepted before its capabilities and any production issues have been properly identified. In the case of Mora National Fish Hatchery, this is because system performance and water quality of the reuse systems could never be verified without actually having a large biomass of fish already

8 | P a g e

in the raceways. The Hatchery commissioning was completed following construction by simply running the water delivery, reuse systems, and effluent systems with clean well water in an automatic mode. This identified that water moves through the system just fine, but did not allow staff to monitor the water quality parameters that would indicate how healthy the fish rearing environment really was. Now armed with a decade and a half of experience, the Hatchery is ready to continue improving the fish rearing infrastructure. The Hatchery was originally designed to carry up to 100,000 lbs of fish while reusing 95% of production water. Since its construction, the facility has only recently achieved just over 2% of the design capacity stated potential. And to operate with only 2% of the design capacity, staff were forced to make significant system modifications, including the construction of new modular systems, and transition to a much higher rate of water usage in the original 3 large reuse systems. Hatchery staff have performed a commendable amount of in-house problem solving to identify many of the original limiting factors. They have developed creative and successful solutions to overcome many of the design limitations, from water treatment systems to in-house design and construction of satellite reuse systems used throughout the hatchery as wild fish isolation systems. The take-home message from the audit and this report is a positive one. Although the current potential usage of the Hatchery remains in the low single-digit percentages of the original concept, the results of the in-house efforts to improve water quality and system performance now allow the facility to operate at a biomass level that is a full order of magnitude higher than was possible less than a decade ago. And building upon the past successes with the opportunities outlined in this document, there is every reason to believe the Hatchery will increase effectiveness by the completion of the 5-year effort.

2.1 Infrastructure The Hatchery relies completely on groundwater for fish rearing and domestic needs from the Mora Valley aquifer. The well field is located nearly 1.5 miles from the Hatchery, adjacent to the Mora River. Water is pumped from a field of four wells to a 150,000-gallon reservoir on the main facility through a pipeline located beneath the County roads. Water is returned by gravity flow to acequias (community water ditch) near the wellfield in a parallel pipeline. The Hatchery is permitted to withdraw 968.5 acre-feet/year from the aquifer for return to the Mora River. Permitted consumption cannot exceed 47.94 acre-feet/year, approximately 5% of the withdrawal allowance. Three major water reuse systems (systems) supporting production and research are operational at the facility. Major components of each system are: three pumps for differing flow rates, a micro-screen drum filter to remove solid waste, propeller washed bead-filters for metabolic waste removal, and a stripping tower to increase dissolved oxygen and decrease carbon dioxide and metabolized nitrogen gas. The systems also have heat exchangers to warm the water when necessary and UV units to sterilize the water. Solid wastes are directed to one of two settling basins. All used water then travels through the earthen pond for final polishing to remove residual nutrients before entering the discharge line for metering and release to the Mora River.

9 | P a g e

Two of the reuse systems utilize 8’ x 50’ raceways. These raceways were installed on a concrete slab so they could be removed in the future for program changes. The third reuse systems is a combination of over 250 rearing units including circular and linear tank designs. These rearing units can be moved easily and re-plumbed for alternate configurations. Five dedicated isolation systems of varying design and size are located throughout the station. These naturalistic rearing units are designed to safely hold wild fish without the contamination risk to the Hatchery and provide as close to a natural setting as possible. 2.2 Purpose

Under Executive Order 13514, all Federal agencies must focus on making improvements in environmental, energy, and economic performance. Since the Hatchery is the second largest consumer of electrical power in Mora County, New Mexico, this operations and infrastructure audit will focus on meeting the Hatchery’s mission while improving environmental, energy, and economic performances.

In 2015, the U.S. Department of Energy National Renewable Energy Laboratory completed a Renewable Energy Assessment for the Mora National Fish Hatchery. This effort focused on infrastructure changes to reduce the electrical demand of the facility.

The Renewable Energy Assessment focused on the following areas:

1) Reducing Carbon Footprint

a. Identified elimination of propane through Ground Source Heat Pumps and Solar Ventilation Air Preheating technology to heat buildings

2) Converting Conventional to Green Power

a. Mapped expansion of the existing solar power panel array grids to achieve net zero energy

3) Expanding Exportable Technology

a. Identified Ground Source Heat Pumps, Solar Pre-Heat technology, and solar panel grids that are exportable to other facilities to achieve net zero energy

The Hatchery is already capitalizing on operational efficiencies to conserve energy. Current electrical consumption is cut in half ($80,000 annually rather than $170,000 annually) by only operating necessary process equipment. Process equipment includes wells, pumps, blowers, UV systems, etc. necessary for fish husbandry operations. This equipment accounts for 80% of the electrical consumption at the Hatchery (Appendix 2). Operational and infrastructure

10 | P a g e

modifications can significantly affect energy efficiency and performance and this audit seeks to optimize each.

3 Operational/Infrastructure Changes for Program Efficiency

3.1 Water Conditioning

The Hatchery currently receives water from a well field approximately 1.5 miles from the Hatchery. This source water has good water quality for aquaculture operations except for low Dissolved Oxygen (DO) and supersaturated total gas levels (N2 saturation). DO conditions average 80% of saturation and N2 saturation average 114%. The Hatchery recently converted the original Carbon Dioxide (CO2) stripping towers into vacuum de-gassers to alleviate the N2 supersaturation issues. Additionally, the Hatchery staff installed DO contactors and injection systems to increase the DO level.

The Hatchery should gas-condition the wellwater at the reservoir prior to distribution to the re-use systems. This project would increase the effectiveness of current N2 removal saturation efforts. Ensuring 100% DO saturation and less than 100% N2 saturation is critical to successful rearing of Gila Trout. N2 saturation greater than 102% can cause chronic fish health problems in aquaculture and DO conditions below saturation create undue stress on cultured fish.

To gas-condition at the reservoir, an oxygen contactor should be sized to handle flows from 1 to 2 wells (180 to 360 gallons per minute). An 18” diameter oxygen contactor could be connected to the existing 6” reservoir supply line. The oxygen contactor is 20’ long with one-foot legs at the bottom to support the contactor. The contactor will be submerged between 5 to 12 feet in the reservoir. This will leave 8 feet of the contactor above the reservoir line for vacuum and oxygen and nitrogen exchange.

A flow switch in the 6” delivery piping is connected to a solenoid valve on the O2 line from the liquid oxygen bottle and the oxygen contactor. When well water flow stops (normal operation), the solenoid valve will close to conserve oxygen.

Recommended Steps for Water Conditioning:

Installation of Oxygen Contactor System in reservoir tank influent line as discussed above. Approximate cost of this project is $15,000 utilizing in-house labor

11 | P a g e

Figure 2. Water Conditioning oxygen contactor for storage reservoir.

3.2 Well Field Efficiency

The four wells comprise about 25% of all power consumption for the facility. They are located about 1.5 miles from the Hatchery site. Currently, the wells pump from the well field to a reservoir tank at the Hatchery site facility. The reservoir tank is 16’ tall and 38’ 7” in diameter, providing the Hatchery up to 140,000 gallons of water under sufficient head pressure for the reuse systems and potable water needs. The reservoir and well control system is currently programed to maintain a 13’ +/- 0.5’ water level in the reservoir tank. To accomplish this, a well pump is started automatically when the reservoir reaches a level of 12.5’. The well pump will continue to operate until the reservoir reaches a level of 13.5’, at which point it will shut off. In the case where a single well pump identified as the ‘lead’ pump cannot maintain the reservoir level, the ‘lag’ pump will automatically start to assist filling the reservoir. When the pumps shut down, two valve actuators shunt water from the reservoir pipe to an overflow pipe at the well field. These valves operate during start-up and shut-down to prevent water hammers (air pockets) in the reservoir pipe. In the past, these valves have leaked, sending 20-40% of the pumped water out the overflow.

12 | P a g e

Discussions following the audit projected a future flow rate of 2 wells (360 gpm). The current reservoir and well operations results in the frequent starting and stopping of two wells to support this flow rate. In addition to shortening the life of the pumps, the lack of soft start capacity and Variable Frequency Drives (VFDs) also results in an unnecessarily high electrical demand rate due to peaking demand on/off in 15 hp intervals rather than running the pump at horsepower needs. Installation of VFDs with soft start features would allow the Hatchery to run the ‘lead’ well pump continuously, and feedback data loop from the reservoir could be used to control the speed of the second well pump and allow it to continuously run also. The result would be a significant reduction in the starting and stopping of well pumps. All four well pumps are submersible-style, each utilizing a 15 hp motor and rated at approximately 180 gpm. Well #4 has not been operable for 10 years, and should be brought back to operable condition as a back-up for the other three wells. Much of the original equipment and reduced-diameter piping installed between the well head and the final delivery pipe leaving each well house is no longer utilized, resulting in unnecessary flow restrictions and additional pumping power demands for each well. Submersible wells are typically installed with the check valve (or ‘foot valve’) located directly above the pump, allowing the pump to start against the pressure of system. During the audit, it appeared that the current system utilizes an above-ground check-valve after the isolation valve. (Hatchery staff did not believe that there was a check valve directly above the pump). Without the check valve installed above the pump, some water in the pipe below the aboveground check valve in the well house will drain back into the well, resulting in the pump starting without sufficient back-pressure (water hammer). This will shorten the life of the pump. Recommended Steps for the Wells:

Verify if a check valve is installed after the pump during future pump removals/replacements

Repair Well #4 and return to full operation Install VFDs with ‘soft-start’ capability Install a level control system in the reservoir tank and utilize the reservoir water level to

control the speed of the selected ‘lag’ well pump. (Roy Skendzel of Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife at a Lower Snake River Compensation Plan program has successfully programmed the Umatilla and Irrigon Hatchery wells to work under a similar system recently. His expertise could be available to install a similar system at the Hatchery at a significant savings over local contractor pricing)

Monitor well field water levels at each well house to determine static and dynamic water levels in each well casing

Remove unnecessary piping restrictions by and replace all 3” piping with 4” pipe After piping restrictions are removed, monitor the pressure at each well with 2 wells

running (normal hatchery flow rate). The measured pressure will be compared to the manufacturer pump curves to determine if the current pump/motor combinations are operating at peak efficiency under normal conditions.

13 | P a g e

Rehabilitation of the fourth well, removal of pipe constrictions, and installation of soft-start and VFDs would cost approximately $45,000.

Figure 3. Well Re-hab and installation of soft-start and VFD controllers

Remove Pipe Constrictions

Well Housing

Valve Actuators

3.3 Raceway Rearing Water Efficiency

The Hatchery operates eight, 8x50 raceways for broodstock holding on two re-use systems, System 1 and System 2. The original design criteria utilized flow rates to achieve water exchange rates of 4 exchanges/hour. To conserve electricity and because Gila trout loading rates are much lower, only one re-use pump is routinely used with much lower flow rates. With this configuration, raceway water exchange rates are 1.17 exchanges per hour. Wedemeyer (2001) recommends a minimum of 2.5 exchanges per hour in plug-flow raceways.

Exchange rates are important for moving solids through a raceway to maintain optimal water quality for trout culture. To achieve additional solids movement without increasing electrical demands the Hatchery should consider raceway baffles (Boerson and Westers 1986). Baffles can be constructed with 5052 aluminum 0.063” x 4’ x 8’ sheets. Additionally, screen slots placed at 12’, 27’ and 42’ will increase flexibility for broodstock holding, baffle support, and settling efficiency.

Recommended Raceway Rearing Water Efficiency Measures:

14 | P a g e

Installation of baffle and screen systems in raceways at a total project cost of $3,640.

Figure 4. Raceway baffle and screen slot modifications.

3.4 Incubation Water Supply System

Eye-up rates for Gila trout have averaged 15%. In 2014, the Hatchery improved eye-up by wet fertilizing eggs directly from males rather than holding the milt on ice. Additionally, changing the incubation water from reuse to single-pass could reduce particulate loading in the egg stacks and increase eye-up rates. This conversion would reduce particulates in the reuse water system that were too small to be removed by the drum screen, but could still be ‘filtered’ in the egg trays, resulting in unnecessary egg-stage mortality. Staff reviewed proposed hatchery flow requirements for proposed future operations and determined single-pass flow to the incubators could be supported.

To utilize wellwater for incubation a simple vacuum de-gassing tower can be constructed in-house with existing tanks and plumbing supplies.

Water Flow

15 | P a g e

Additionally, the development of the Spruce, Whiskey and Iron Creek lineages will require additional incubation space in the future. By stacking the egg incubation systems, the incubation capacity can be doubled without requiring additional water. In order to accommodate the captive brood development of five Gila trout lineages, a 10-unit, double-stacked incubation system will be needed. This system will require 50 gallons per minute at peak operation and will cost $10,500 including 5 additional incubation stacks.

Figure 5. Incubation water supply system.

3.5 System Influent Degassing Modifications

The water delivery system was originally constructed with a large John Colt-style degassing tower sitting above a head tank column in the System 3 area of the hatchery building. While the John Colt towers have proven to be very effective, the design application at Mora resulted in two ‘negatives’ for Hatchery operations:

1. The selected style of degasser is ‘flow-dependent’, meaning that it must operate at the design flow rate to optimize its ability to remove nitrogen from the water supply. The tower utilizes the incoming flow to create a vacuum level sufficient enough to strip the

16 | P a g e

nitrogen. If the flow rate is high enough, the vacuum level is high enough; but when the flow rate is not high enough, the vacuum level drops, which subsequently reduces the degasser’s ability to remove nitrogen. Since there is only one degasser for all of the incoming Hatchery water supply, the design team assumed the Hatchery would be continuously operating under full-flow conditions (the design capacity of the well field with all 4 wells running). Since the Hatchery was typically operated at about 180 gpm in the past (flow rate of a single well), the degassing tower never reached sufficient vacuum levels to remove nitrogen to a safe level for fish production. The result was the need for Hatchery operators to develop local systems for nitrogen removal at each Reuse System.

2. Passing water through the original degassing tower into the head box column lowered the amount of head pressure in the influent system to the Hatchery from the elevation of the reservoir tank water level to the level of the head box column under the original degasser. Once operators installed local degassing equipment and bypassed the original degassing system, the result was increased pressure and flow capacity to each of the Reuse Systems local systems.

Several years ago, the original Carbon Dioxide (CO2) stripping towers were converted into vacuum degassers to alleviate the N2 supersaturation issues. At current fish loading rates, this conversion has worked well. However, as fish loading increases to meet objectives of the Gila Trout–Genetic Broodstock Management Plan, the vacuum de-gassers will not be sufficient to maintain the optimal rearing conditions.

To alleviate this problem, vacuum degassers should be installed on the influent lines of the makeup water supply for each system. These vacuum degassers coupled with the influent water conditioning system at the reservoir (Section 3.1) will ensure optimal gas conditions for make-up water. With the make-up water conditioned, the CO2 stripping towers can be returned to operation as CO2 stripping devices. In addition, the existing CO2 strippers should be replaced with units sized for proper operation of each of the three Reuse Systems.

Additionally, the current make-up water entry points in the microscreen sumps create the potential for bypassing to overflow drains. The make-up water entry should be moved as close as possible to the re-use pick-up lines.

Recommended Hatchery Building DeGassing Modifications:

Install vacuum degassers at each influent (makeup) entry point to re-use systems. The cost of the vacuum degassing modification project for 3 systems using in-house labor is approximately $10,000.

17 | P a g e

Figure 6. System influent degassing modifications

3.6 Alarm System Rehab

The reuse systems and alarms are controlled by a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system. This same system has been in operation for over 15 years with relatively few upgrades. Reuse systems are dependent on functional alarm system and quick staff response times. Although the reuse systems and back-up systems are fully automated, staff response is still necessary and desired to ensure all systems functioned correctly during power failures, etc.

The SCADA system should be upgraded. In addition, expanding the YSI 5500 water quality monitoring systems would provide another redundancy of the alarm system.

Recommended Steps for Alarm System:

Update the SCADA system and install additional water quality/alarm systems for $50,000.

18 | P a g e

3.7 Isolation Systems

The Hatchery maintains five isolation systems for wild Gila trout refugia and incorporation into broodstock programs. Over the past several years, three of the five systems have been overhauled. The isolation systems are overhauled every three years to replace aging pumps, blowers, etc. and maintain trouble-free operation. Currently, the Visitor Center and Shady Acres systems are overdue for rebuilding.

The basic system includes three ½ - 1 horsepower Jacuzzi-style pumps, two ¾ horsepower Sweetwater blowers, 2 biofilters, 2 microscreens, 2 vacuum degassers, and one oxygen contactor. The tanks are generally four, 5 to 6-foot circulars.

These isolation systems utilize Nature’s rearing habitat, tank interconnection, live diets, polyculture, and dark colored tanks to help transition fish into the Hatchery environment.

System overhauls should include retrofitting to all circular tanks with center drain standpipes and influent jets. Where possible, the two dimensional Nature’s rearing holographic images should be utilized to mimic substrate in the rearing containers (Appendix 5). Compared to traditional Nature’s rearing, 2-dimensional substrate will improve water quality of the systems and be conducive to providing flow regimes at 2 body-lengths per second for optimal fish conditioning.

In addition, the vacuum degassers should be sized for anticipated makeup water flow rates and retrofitted with blower vents just above the headtank water surface (Figure 8). Utilizing these changes will increase efficiency and CO2 stripping capacity. Makeup water flow entry points should also be placed as closely as possible to the reuse intakes to avoid bypassing of makeup water to sump overflows.

Recommended Steps for Isolation Systems:

Overhaul overdue Visitor Center and Shady Acres systems at a total cost of $30,000

Replace or retrofit existing tanks with 2-D rearing habitat to mimic substrate in rearing units

Overhaul isolation systems every 3 years at an annual cost of $15,000

19 | P a g e

Figure 7. Isolation rearing system

Figure 8. Vacuum degassing model

20 | P a g e

3.8 Water Monitoring

The Hatchery operates 8 complex re-use systems. DO levels, total gas pressure, pH, and total system flow rates are recorded daily via spot checks. The YSI 5500 meters are used in the isolation systems to continuously monitor DO levels, total gas pressure, and flow rates. These meters report back to an Aquamanager program that summarizes and stores water quality trend data. In addition, the meters are linked to a Sensaphone alarm system to alert Hatchery staff if parameters are outside of the range.

Periodically, ammonia, CO2, nitrate, nitrite, and other water quality parameters are also measured.

Flow meters should be installed on all 7 make-up water entry points. The make-up water is a vital component of the reuse systems; flushing the system to ensure water quality remains optimal. In addition, excess makeup water taxes the wells and results in increased energy consumption.

Flow meters should be coupled with additional YSI 5500 units for each of the 3 main systems for continuously monitoring water quality parameters. In addition, CO2 levels should be recorded as part of routine water quality monitoring.

Recommended Steps for Water Monitoring:

Install additional water monitoring equipment at a projected cost of approximately $21,100

3.9 Water Disinfection Systems

The Hatchery was originally designed with ozone disinfection units for each of the reuse systems. Unfortunately, the ozone units never worked as planned and were replaced with UV disinfection units about 5 years after the Hatchery was commissioned. These UV units were relatively small since they were plumbed into the original ozone injection sites and treated a side-stream of about 200 gallons per minute (≈ 30% of flow). This treatment reduced pathogens and fungus loads, but left rearing units in each reuse system essentially ‘interconnected’.

In 2014, one of these UV units was replaced with a larger unit to treat 1,000 gallons per minute. This treatment rate should be sufficient to treat the entire flow needed for the rearing units and effectively isolate them from each other. This isolation will ensure disease or fungus outbreaks can be contained to individual rearing units.

Recommended Steps for Water Disinfection Systems:

21 | P a g e

Replace the remaining two UV units with these larger units to ensure biosecurity between rearing vessels. The cost for this project is approximately $100,000.

3.10 Ground-Source Heat Pump Conversion

The Hatchery’s Renewable Energy Assessment (2015) included conversion of the existing Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) systems to Ground-Source Heat pumps. This project would eliminate propane use on-site, save $6,205/year, and provide production water chilling capability during winter months.

The Hatchery currently uses over 10,000 gallons of propane annually for heating buildings. Conversion to a Ground-Source Heat Pump (GSHP) system would utilize wasted heat from production effluent water to heat buildings. Subsequent water chilling capability in the hatchery building would lower the over-winter System water temps to 40 F to emulate water temps of the Gila Wilderness.

Over the past several years, a shift in Gila Trout spawn timing has been noticed due to a series of warm winters and corresponding shifts in overwintering water temps. Ambient lighting with timers has been installed to ensure proper photoperiods, but water temperature is also influencing the spawn timing. Utilizing a GSHP system to lower the Reuse System water temps would restore the spawn timing to match Recovery. These efforts would make the Gila trout produced at the Hatchery more suitable for Recovery programs.

Mora National Fish Hatchery Proposed Water Temperatures

Month Temp (F) Proposed Temp (F) Delta T (F)

January 51 40 11

February 52 45 7

March 53 53 0

April 55 55 0

May 56 56 0

June 58 58 0

July 59 59 0

August 58 58 0

September 58 50 8

October 57 45 12

November 55 40 15

December 52 40 12

Figure 9. Average annual system temperatures

Recommended Steps for Ground-Source Heat Pump conversion:

22 | P a g e

Convert the current HVAC system to a GSHP to eliminate propane use, reduce overall energy use, and match system water temps to Recovery streams at a cost of $90,000. This project has the potential to significantly reduce a very large carbon footprint while simultaneously improving Gila trout recovery objectives.

3.11 System Modification to Meet Program Objectives

The Hatchery was originally designed as a research facility for rainbow trout production. Fortunately, the original design incorporated flexibility for program changes. The Hatchery staff has taken advantage of these flexibilities to make a successful captive brood program of the Main Diamond and South Diamond lineages of Gila trout. As the Hatchery develops Spruce, Whiskey and Iron Creek lineage brood programs, additional facility modifications will be needed.

To meet Gila Trout recovery goals, the Hatchery is expected to maintain captive and wild broodstock with a minimum of 80 unique spawning pairings annually per lineage with more than 50 surviving fry each (Figure 9 and Appendix 1).

The Hatchery is a fully Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS). However, similar system designs by Montgomery Watson and Harza (consulting engineering firm) during the same timeframe have faced significant obstacles. The Hatchery’s system is largely untested under design loadings which becomes critical as the program expands to include 5 lineages of Gila trout.

Rather than rely on the full RAS (> 80% re-use), it would be better to approach the future use of the reuse systems as Partial Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (PRAS, <80% re-use). While PRAS systems use more make-up water from the well field, they have significant advantages:

1) Less intensive and lower risk of catastrophic system failures due to biological crashes

2) No biofilters to maintain or backwash

3) When coupled with dual-drain circulars, waste water can be concentrated for more effective phosphorus and nitrogen removal to meet the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements. Hatchery designs utilizing reuse systems have replaced raceways with dual drain tanks to significantly improve solids control.

4) Increased swimming velocities in dual-drain circular tanks have shown promising results of increased fitness and survival (2-fold) in fish released to the wild.

Several infrastructure changes have been noted in the previous 8 sections (3.1-3.8). These changes should be considered interim changes towards a longer term goal of moving the Hatchery to a PRAS design with dual-drain circular tanks. In addition, the Hatchery will benefit from designing the tank configurations to meet the needs of the Gila trout recovery program.

23 | P a g e

Matching the Hatchery infrastructure to the recovery needs will improve rearing conditions, survival, and increase efficiency.

3.11.1 System 1 Modifications

System 1 rearing units include four 8’ by 50’ raceways. These raceways are generally used for captive broodstock holding. Approximately 150 gallons per minute of flow is provided to each raceway.

System 1 modifications include: installation of an isolation curtain, replacement of 4 raceways with in lieu of ten 10-foot dual drain circular tanks with 2-D rearing habitat (Appendix 5), removal replacement of the existing gas stripping tower with CO2/Low Head Oxygenation (LHO) combination tower, and conversion to wild fish isolation for brood development.

The 10-foot dual drain circulars with 2-D rearing habitat would improve fish conditioning; add self-cleaning; add Nature’s rearing habitat; improve the ability to treat effluent waste; and allow rearing unit separation of 5 wild Gila trout lineages.

The CO2/LHO combination tower will improve CO2 stripping capacity and increase oxygen transfer efficiency. These units are available “off the shelf” from several companies and could be purchased and installed for approximately $31,840 each.

Wild fish isolation for brood development for System 1 would expedite the development of captive brood. Currently, wild fish are held in the 5 isolation systems. While these isolation systems are needed for “quarantine” during the first 30 to 60 days of holding, long-term holding in these small systems has drawbacks:

1) Isolated systems have been matched for photoperiod, but water temperature differences and light changes have resulted in 2 to 4 week offsets in spawn timing. The spawn timing disparity has caused missed fertilization windows between the captive and wild broodstocks. Moving the wild fish to System 1 would better match rearing conditions of the captive brood for spawning synchronization.

2) Broodstock held in isolation systems have had consistently lower eye-up success than broodstock held in System 1. While some lineage differences exist, consistently lower eye-up rates suggest water quality issues.

3) Managing 5 isolation systems is risky. Each system has at least 3 pumps and 2 mechanical blowers along with associated plumbing and alarm systems. Failure of any of these systems can cause catastrophic losses. System 1 is controlled and backed up by the SCADA system. The SCADA system attempts a solution to mechanical problems while simultaneously notifying staff.

24 | P a g e

4) Isolation systems consume significant amount of power. Conversion to rearing in System 1 would save an estimated 16% of the annual electrical consumption or approximately $12,932 annually (Appendix 2).

System 1 would consist of 10 tanks. Each lineage would have 2 tanks dedicated for broodstock holding and development. Broodstock would be held at 0.75 lbs/ft3 well below guidelines established by the Genetic Broodstock Management Plan. This would allow maximum holding of 200 wild broodstock per lineage.

Recommended Steps for System 1 Rearing:

Convert to dual-drain circular tanks and associated plumbing at an approximate cost of $113,344

Purchase and installation of CO2/LHO system for $31,840

Properly size each of the Reuse system pumps (motor size and impellor trim) to ensure optimal pumping efficiency at new system flow rates for $15,000.


System 2 rearing units include four 8’ by 50’ raceways. These raceways are generally used for captive broodstock holding. Each raceway is supplied by approximately 150 gallons per minute from the re-use system.

System 2 modifications include: removal of 4 raceways in lieu of fifteen, 10-foot dual drain circular tanks with 2-D rearing habitat and removal of existing gas stripping tower for installation of CO2/LHO combination tower. Cost for tank replacement and CO2/LHO installation is approximately $177,500.

Conversion of System 2 from raceways to fifteen, 10-foot circular tanks would have several advantages:

1) Fifteen rearing tanks would allow each lineage 3 rearing vessels to isolate each brood year. The Hatchery would spawn Age 2 males with Age 3 females. Age 1 broodstock fish would be approximately 200 fish per lineage. At Age 2, 100 fish (males) would be used for spawning, and 100 females would remain for Age 3 broodstock.

2) Circular tanks and flows of 2 body lengths/second would provide better broodstock conditioning. Increased broodstock fitness should increase fecundity and egg survival.

Recommended Steps for System 2 Rearing:

25 | P a g e

Convert to dual-drain circular tanks and install CO2/LHO water conditioning for approximately $198,917



System 3 rearing units include: 144, 10-gallon aquariums; 42, 30-gallon circulars, 24, 96-gallon circulars; 12, 250-gallon circulars; 6, 380-gallon circulars; 8, 440 gallon raceways, 4, 2500 gallon circulars. System 3 modifications include: removal of all tanks and replacement with 10, 16-foot circulars, 10, 6-foot circulars, 400 tanks in G-Hab or X-Hab Systems (Pentair Aquatic Ecosystems), and installation of a CO2/LHO combination tower. All tanks (except the G-Hab System), would incorporate 2-D rearing habitat. Conversion of System 3 would have several advantages:

1) Conversion of multiple rearing units to ten, 16-foot dual-drain circulars would provide rearing space for over 100,000 Age-0 Gila trout annually. These fish could be used to support broodstock, recovery and recreational goals.

2) Adding ten, 6-foot circulars would provide isolated rearing for captive broodstock families after PIT tagging operations.

3) Circular tanks for all Age-0 rearing will provide optimal rearing conditions and conditioning of the Gila trout.

4) Installation of G-Hab or X-Hab systems from Pentair Aquatic Ecosytems provides an “off the shelf” solution for holding multiple families in separate rearing containers until tagging operations can be completed. These systems save floor space and would increase the space of current aquarium systems threefold to accommodate the three new lineages.

5) Each of the Five lineages would have 2 tank replicates for recovery and broodstock development fish (Figure 9).

Recommended Steps for System 3 Rearing

Convert to dual-drain circular tanks and LHO/CO2 water conditioning for approximately $374,103


26 | P a g e

500 Age-1

1,000 Fingerling

3,000 Fingerling

80 Aquariums

4000 fry

Incubation Stacks

60,000 eggs

4,000 Fry

200 Age-2

Excess fry Recovery and 4(d) streams

20,000 Fry 20,000 Age-0, 30 fpp

100 Captive Brood and 100 Wild Brood (80 successful crosses)

10-foot Brood

Circulars

16-foot Recovery Circulars

100 Age-3

Figure 9. Hatchery Gila Recovery Flow Diagram for each Lineage

s

27 | P a g e

Figure 10. Current System tank configuration

Figure 11. Proposed tank configuration for Gila trout program

28 | P a g e

4 Summary

The future of Mora National Fish Hatchery and Gila trout recovery is a bright. The Hatchery has been in operation for over seventeen years and working with Gila trout recovery for the last decade. The exceptionally motivated staff has adapted the facility to meet the challenges of species recovery.

At the time of commissioning as a state-of-the-art research facility, the Hatchery utilized the best technology available for Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS). Over almost two decades, a lot of technology has changed and the needs of the Gila trout recovery program have evolved. Fortunately, the planning team for the Hatchery had incredible foresight. Unlike most “brick and mortar” hatchery facilities, Mora was designed with flexibility. This flexibility makes Mora a flagship in the National Fish Hatchery system and a model for adaptability in the face of Global climate change, resource challenges, and other shifting targets in species conservation.

This infrastructure and operations audit coupled with the recent energy assessment have identified specific projects to accomplish in a 5-year plan. The energy assessment document identified projects programs to assist with funding of energy conservation projects. The infrastructure and operations audit has identified projects to improve efficiencies and align with energy conservation goals. These infrastructure and operations projects total $1.15M of capital outlay into the Hatchery.

Significant savings can be achieved by utilizing the in-house staff resources for accomplishing these projects. The Hatchery staff are motivated, energetic, knowledgeable, and dedicated to the success of the Gila trout recovery program. Numerous infrastructure improvements with minimal resources have been accomplished already by the staff. These future projects will build on the staff’s expertise and enthusiasm to take the Hatchery and the Gila trout program into the future.

Investment into the Mora National Fish Hatchery and Gila trout recovery is a sound use of resources. The Hatchery’s unique planning and design have made it a harbinger for the National Fish Hatchery system. Mora’s crew is exceptional and serves as a model for teamwork and cooperation towards a common vision. Updating the Mora National Fish Hatchery will ensure the success of the Gila trout recovery program and be a model for the Fisheries Program.

29 | P a g e

Appendix 1. Proposed Production Capacities

Main Diamond 500 20,000

Captive Brood

Age 1 500

Age 2 300

Age 3 30,000 100

Wild Brood

Age 2 100

Age 3 30,000 100

South Diamond 500 20,000

Captive Brood

Age 1 500

Age 2 300

Age 3 30,000 100

Wild Brood

Age 2 100

Age 3 30,000 100

Whiskey Creek 500 20,000

Captive Brood

Age 1 500

Age 2 300

Age 3 30,000 100

Wild Brood

Age 2 100

Age 3 30,000 100

Spruce Creek 500 20,000

Captive Brood

Age 1 500

Age 2 300

Age 3 30,000 100

Wild Brood

Age 2 100

Age 3 30,000 100

Iron Creek 500 20,000

Captive Brood

Age 1 500

Age 2 300

Age 3 30,000 100

Wild Brood

Age 2 100

Age 3 30,000 100

Totals 300,000 5,500 2,500 100,000

Lineage Total Eggs (Green) Total Brood Age 0

RecoveryAge 1

Recovery

30 | P a g e

Appendix 2. Budget Outlay, Fiscal Year 2015-2019

Mora National Fish Hatchery, Budget Outlay for Infrastructure/Operations Modifications

Project Description Sub Description FundYear Funding

3.1 Rservoir H2O Treatment 2016 15,000$

3.2 Well Field VFD's and Soft Start 2016 45,000$

3.2 Re-hab Well 4 2016 20,000$

3.3 Raceway Baffles 2015 3,640$

3.4 Incubation Re-hab 2015 10,500$

3.5De-gas Make-up water to

Systems2016 10,000$

3.6 SCADA System Fix 2016 50,000$

3.7 Isolation System Re-hab 2016 30,000$

3.8 Water Monitoring 2016 21,100$

3.9 UV Disinfection 2017 100,000$

3.1 Ground Source Heat Pump 2017 90,000$

3.11.1 System 1 Tank Re-design 2017 160,184$ Tanks 54,450$

Tank Plumbing 24,000$

2-D Tank Coating 15,000$

CO2 Stripper/LHO System 21,840$

CO2 Stripper Plumbing 9,000$

Re-Size System Pumps 15,000$

Engineering Work 20,894$


Tank Plumbing 36,000$







Plumbing 50,000$





Z-Hab Systems 75,000$


Total 1,158,443$

31 | P a g e

Appendix 3. Power Consumption by Process Application

Mora National Fish Hatchery, Power Consumption by process system.

Location Type Hp Voltage Amps Manufacturer Model

Daily

Kw/hrs

Electric

Rate

($/kwh) Daily Cost

Monthly

Cost Annual Cost On/Off

Current

Power Use

Proposed

Power Use

Months

Proposed

Power Cost

System 1 Pump 20 460 24 US Electric 324JH 265 0.12$ 31.80$ 953.86$ 11,446.27$ 0 -$ 0 -$


System 1 Pump 15 460 17.7 World Motor 6310-s/c3 195 0.12$ 23.45$ 703.47$ 8,441.63$ 1 8,441.63$ 12 8,441.63$

System 1 Blower 1 115 9.8 Sweetwater J611AX 27 0.12$ 3.25$ 97.37$ 1,168.47$ 1 1,168.47$ 12 1,168.47$

System 1 UV 115 9.6 ATS DWS-275 26 0.12$ 3.18$ 95.39$ 1,144.63$ 1 1,144.63$ 12 1,144.63$



System 2 Pump 15 460 17.7 World Motor 195 0.12$ 23.45$ 703.47$ 8,441.63$ 1 8,441.63$ 12 8,441.63$

System 2 Blower 1 115 9.8 Sweetwater J611AX 27 0.12$ 3.25$ 97.37$ 1,168.47$ 1 1,168.47$ 12 1,168.47$

System 2 UV 115 9.6 ATS DWS-275 26 0.12$ 3.18$ 95.39$ 1,144.63$ 1 1,144.63$ 12 1,144.63$

System 3 Pump 20 460 24 US Electric 324JH 265 0.12$ 31.80$ 953.86$ 11,446.27$ 0 -$ 4 3,815.42$

System 3 Pump 15 460 18.2 US Electric FR256JM 201 0.12$ 24.11$ 723.34$ 8,680.09$ 0 -$ 0 -$

System 3 Pump 7.5 460 9.5 World Motor FCT4 105 0.12$ 12.59$ 377.57$ 4,530.82$ 1 4,530.82$ 5 1,887.84$

System 3 Blower 1 115 9.8 Sweetwater J611AX 27 0.12$ 3.25$ 97.37$ 1,168.47$ 1 1,168.47$ 5 486.86$

System 3 UV 115 9.6 ATS DWS-275 26 0.12$ 3.18$ 95.39$ 1,144.63$ 1 1,144.63$ 5 476.93$

Well #1 Pump 15 460 20.8 Franklin Electric 2366138020 230 0.12$ 27.56$ 826.68$ 9,920.10$ 1 9,920.10$ 12 9,920.10$

Well #2 Pump 15 460 20.8 Franklin Electric 2366138020 230 0.12$ 27.56$ 826.68$ 9,920.10$ 0.5 4,960.05$ 12 9,920.10$

Well #3 Pump 15 460 20.8 Franklin Electric 2366138020 230 0.12$ 27.56$ 826.68$ 9,920.10$ 0 -$ 5 4,133.38$

Well #4 Pump 15 460 20.8 Franklin Electric 2366138020 230 0.12$ 27.56$ 826.68$ 9,920.10$ 0 -$ 0 -$

Shady Acres Pump 1 115 14 AO Smith 7-184948-22 39 0.12$ 4.64$ 139.10$ 1,669.25$ 1 1,669.25$ 0 -$

Shady Acres Pump 2 115 21 AO Smith 7-184950-22 58 0.12$ 6.96$ 208.66$ 2,503.87$ 1 2,503.87$ 0 -$

Shady Acres Pump 2 115 21 AO Smith 7-184950-22 58 0.12$ 6.96$ 208.66$ 2,503.87$ 0 -$ 0 -$

Shady Acres Blower 1 115 9.8 Sweetwater J611AX 27 0.12$ 3.25$ 97.37$ 1,168.47$ 1 1,168.47$ 0 -$

Shady Acres Blower 1 115 9.8 Sweetwater J611AX 27 0.12$ 3.25$ 97.37$ 1,168.47$ 1 1,168.47$ 0 -$

Shady Acres UV 115 2 W Lim corp UVP8 640 6 0.12$ 0.66$ 19.87$ 238.46$ 1 238.46$ 0 -$

Whiskey Pump 0.75 115 8.8 AO Smith 7-184947-22 24 0.12$ 2.91$ 87.44$ 1,049.24$ 1 1,049.24$ 0 -$

Whiskey Pump 1 115 14 AO Smith 7-184948-22 39 0.12$ 4.64$ 139.10$ 1,669.25$ 1 1,669.25$ 0 -$

Whiskey Pump 1 115 14 AO Smith 7-184948-22 39 0.12$ 4.64$ 139.10$ 1,669.25$ 0 -$ 0 -$

Whiskey Blower 1 115 9.8 Sweetwater J611AX 27 0.12$ 3.25$ 97.37$ 1,168.47$ 1 1,168.47$ 0 -$

Whiskey Blower 1 115 9.8 Sweetwater J611AX 27 0.12$ 3.25$ 97.37$ 1,168.47$ 1 1,168.47$ 0 -$

Whiskey UV 115 2 W Lim corp UVP8 640 6 0.12$ 0.66$ 19.87$ 238.46$ 1 238.46$ 0 -$

Incubation Blower 1 115 9.8 Sweetwater J611AX 27 0.12$ 3.25$ 97.37$ 1,168.47$ 0 -$ 3 292.12$

Spruce Pump 1 230 8 Century 0-196261-24 44 0.12$ 5.30$ 158.98$ 1,907.71$ 1 1,907.71$ 0 -$

Spruce Pump 1 230 8 Century 0-196261-24 44 0.12$ 5.30$ 158.98$ 1,907.71$ 0 -$ 0 -$

Spruce Pump 0.5 115 2.7 Marathon skcr38snc429S 7 0.12$ 0.89$ 26.83$ 321.93$ 1 321.93$ 0 -$

Spruce Blower 1 115 9.8 Sweetwater J611AX 27 0.12$ 3.25$ 97.37$ 1,168.47$ 1 1,168.47$ 0 -$

Spruce Blower 1 115 9.8 Sweetwater J611AX 27 0.12$ 3.25$ 97.37$ 1,168.47$ 1 1,168.47$ 0 -$

Spruce UV 115 2 W Lim corp UVP8 640 6 0.12$ 0.66$ 19.87$ 238.46$ 1 238.46$ 0 -$

Visitor Center Pump 0.75 115 8.8 AO Smith 7-184947-22 24 0.12$ 2.91$ 87.44$ 1,049.24$ 1 1,049.24$ 0 -$

Visitor Center Pump 1 115 14 AO Smith 7-184948-22 39 0.12$ 4.64$ 139.10$ 1,669.25$ 1 1,669.25$ 0 -$

Visitor Center Pump 1 115 14 AO Smith 7-184948-22 39 0.12$ 4.64$ 139.10$ 1,669.25$ 0 -$ 0 -$

Visitor Center Blower 1 115 9.8 Sweetwater J611AX 27 0.12$ 3.25$ 97.37$ 1,168.47$ 1 1,168.47$ 0 -$

Visitor Center Blower 1 115 9.8 Sweetwater J611AX 27 0.12$ 3.25$ 97.37$ 1,168.47$ 1 1,168.47$ 0 -$

Visitor Center UV 115 2 W Lim corp UVP8 640 6 0.12$ 0.66$ 19.87$ 238.46$ 1 238.46$ 0 -$

Visitor Center Pump 0.75 115 8.8 AO Smith 7-184947-22 24 0.12$ 2.91$ 87.44$ 1,049.24$ 0 -$ 0 -$



Visitor Center Blower 1 115 9.8 Sweetwater J611AX 27 0.12$ 3.25$ 97.37$ 1,168.47$ 0 -$ 0 -$

Visitor Center Blower 1 115 9.8 Sweetwater J611AX 27 0.12$ 3.25$ 97.37$ 1,168.47$ 0 -$ 0 -$

Visitor Center UV 115 2 W Lim corp UVP8 640 6 0.12$ 0.66$ 19.87$ 238.46$ 0 -$ 0 -$

Spare Pump 20 460 24 US Electric 324JM 265 0.12$ 31.80$ 953.86$ 11,446.27$ 0 -$ 0 -$




Spare Pump 15 460 18.2 US Electric 256JM 201 0.12$ 24.11$ 723.34$ 8,680.09$ 0 -$ 0 -$

Spare Pump 15 460 18.2 US Electric 256JM 201 0.12$ 24.11$ 723.34$ 8,680.09$ 0 -$ 0 -$

Spare Pump 7.5 460 9.5 World Motor FCT4 105 0.12$ 12.59$ 377.57$ 4,530.82$ 0 -$ 0 -$

Spare Blower 1 115 9.8 Sweetwater J611AX 27 0.12$ 3.25$ 97.37$ 1,168.47$ 0 -$ 0 -$

Spare Blower 1 115 9.8 Sweetwater J611AX 27 0.12$ 3.25$ 97.37$ 1,168.47$ 0 -$ 0 -$

Spare Blower 1.5 115 20.7 Sweetwater XL56C2 57 0.12$ 6.86$ 205.68$ 2,468.10$ 0 -$ 0 -$

Spare Blower 1.5 115 20.7 Sweetwater XL56C2 57 0.12$ 6.86$ 205.68$ 2,468.10$ 0 -$ 0 -$

246,917.55$ 65,374.91$ 52,442.21$

Actual 81,953.00$ 69,020.30$

Reduction 16%

32 | P a g e

Appendix 4. System Modeling

System 1 System 2 System 2 System 2 System 2 System 3 System 3 System 3

Age 1 & 2 Age 1 Age 2 Age 3 Early Rearing 16' Grow out 6' Captive

Wild Brood Captive Brood Captive Brood Captive Brood Isolation Tanks Tanks Brood Tanks

Mora NFH 0.5 fpp 1 fpp 0.5 fpp 0.3 fpp Total 100 fpp 30 fpp 30 fpp

Proposed Consolidation 0.75 lbs/ft3 0.75 lbs/ft3 0.75 lbs/ft3 0.75 lbs/ft3 Flow 0.77 lbs/ft3 0.55 lbs/ft3 0.4 lbs/ft3

into Systems 1, 2, and 3 circ's circ's circ's circ's circ's circ's circ's circ's

Grow Out Grow Out Grow Out Grow Out Grow Out Grow Out Grow Out Grow Out

September September September September September September September September

Production Goal 1,000 1,000 500 0 0 130,000 10,000

Size at Release

fish per pound 0.5 1.0 0.5 0.30 100.0 30.0 30.0

grams 907 454 907 1,512 5 15 15

Target Loading Density

pounds/cubic foot 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.77 0.55 0.40

kilos/cubic meter 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.3 8.8 6.4

Tank Style Circular Circular Circular Circular Aquarium Circular Circular

Dimensions 10' x 4' 10' x 4' 10' x 4' 10' x 4' 10 gallon 16' x 4.5' 6' x 3.5'

Diameter 10 10 10 10 16 6

Rearing Height 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 4 3

Volume in cubic feet 275 275 275 275 1.3 804 85

Volume in cubic meters 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 0.0 22.8 2.4

Gallons per tank 2,056 2,056 2,056 2,056 10 6,016 634

Maximum Number of Fish per Unit 103 206 103 62 100 13,270 1,018

Number of Rearing Units Needed 10.0 5.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 10.0

Pounds of production 2,000 1,000 1,000 0 0 4,333 333

% Feed Rate at Max Production 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

Pounds of feed per day at max production 20 10 10 0 0 43 3

DO Consumption (pounds/day) 7.0 3.5 3.5 0.0 0.0 15.2 1.2

Single Pass (.35 lbs O2/lb feed)

Influent DO level (mg/L) 11 11 11 11 11 11 11

Effluent DO level (mg/L) 9.33 9.33 9.33 9.33 9.25 9.75 10.10

SINGLE PASS

Min Flow Rate NEW water on Single Pass (gpm) 341 171 171 0 0 986 105

Min Flow NEW water per Rearing Container (gpm) 34 34 34 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 99 11

System 2

Flow Rate at 75% Reuse Total Flow

Min Flow Rate NEW water on 75% Reuse 85 43 43 0 85 0 247 26

Min Flow NEW water per Rearing Container (gpm) 9 9 9 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 25 3

Tank Exchanges per Hour 1.00 1.00 1.00 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 0.98 1.00

Minutes per Exchange 60 60 60 #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 61 60

33 | P a g e

Appendix 5. 2-D Nature’s Rearing for Circular tanks

Double-Sided Bulk Aquarium Backgrounds (18” x 25ft)

Polyester Veils for Fiberglass boats – in-stock camouflage pattern.

The Hatchery utilizes Nature’s rearing techniques to improve Gila trout performance on-site. These techniques include the addition of substrate (rocks, artificial vegetation, logs, etc.) to the rearing units, pool and riffle habitats, live diets, and polyculture with other native fishes.

Instead of utilizing 3-dimensional substrate additions, the Hatchery may consider 2-dimensional holographic substrate additions. Recent advancements of Polyester Veils (http://www.stealthveils.com/8.html) for the camouflage industry utilize multiple layers of graphics to create a 3-D appearance in 2-D plane. Similarly, the hobby aquariumists have utilized 2-D graphic backgrounds to give the appearance of 3-D habitat scenes in aquariums (http://usa.hagen.com/Aquatic/Decorative/Backgrounds/11774).

The Hatchery has done some preliminary research with Reiff Manufacturing (Walla Walla, WA) on inlaying these products into fiberglass rearing tanks. This 2-D substrate would maintain Nature’s rearing benefits while adding the benefits increased water velocities of dual-drain circular rearing systems.

http://www.stealthveils.com/8.html

34 | P a g e

5 References

Boersen, B. and Westers, H. 1986. Waste Solids Control in Hatchery Raceways. The Progressive Fish Culturist 48:151-154.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Gila Trout Recovery Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2002. Gila Trout – Genetic Broodstock Management Plan. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Albuquerque, New Mexico.

U.S. Department of Energy. 2015. Renewable Energy Assessment for the Mora National Fish Hatchery. U.S. Department of Energy National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado.

Wedemeyer, Gary A. editor 2001. Fish Hatchery Management, second edition. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland.

infrastructure and operations audit of the mora national ... · renewable energy laboratory,...

Documents